Navamsas & Noviens - misc discussion

[Jim Eshelman]

[This thread is harvested from an earlier thread from the old site. It picks up with a response (now deleted) asking about Cyril Fagan's natal chart and some particulars about the system, and then this thread found a life of its own that continues below. - Admin]

I'm at least convinced that the 10° aspect series is valid and even important, and the Novien/Navamsa makes that part very obvious. We could, though, see it as well from the natal chart:

8°20' Virgo - Moon
8°34' Taurus - Sun
18°41' Taurus - Pluto
28°48' Libra - Uranus

Similarly, you can see my most important Navamsa/Novien aspect from the birth chart (one has to make a point of looking):

17°20' Libra - Mercury
27°24' Aquarius - Moon

[Jim Eshelman]

Do we allow our siderealists principles/guidelines for angularly to apply to these charts?

No angles.

But what PASSES for angles are the Moon's hard aspects

[Jim Eshelman]

Jim wrote:

But what PASSES for angles are the Moon's hard aspects.

Yes, upon further searching, I found some more Fagan words from ‘Primer of Sidereal Astrology’ with his discussion about the Novien/Navamsas charts:

It must not be supposed as our Hindu brethren would have us believe that the novien chart is a secondary geniture. It is nothing of the sort. It is just an aspectarian-vernier. It permits the user to measure micro-aspects that may not be otherwise apparent (with the natal chart), especially to the Moon, always remembering that here we are dealing with micro-ecliptical mutual configurations, and not with the mundane sphere. Remember an orb of merely one degree in the birth chart is equivalent to an orb of nine degrees in the novien, so it is not difficult to see how sensitive and critical the novien can be. Philogistically, it would appear that the ayanamsas had their origin in ancient Egypt, for the Egyptian phonetics for the new Moon psd (peshed), and for the number nine were identical. It would seem the antiquated Egyptians had solved “in minutes” this problem of symbolics some 6000 years before Messrs, Franklin and Carter had “progressed” to that idea.

[Jim Eshelman]

Fagan is off base with his history in this quote, but he did discover new ways of using the navamsa/novien chart. The traditional Indian way of using the navamsa is different, however. The chart was used as a supplemental marriage chart. But its main importance was to indicate a 'second sign' for natal planets. It was especially good if a natal planet was vargottama, in the same sign as a natal planet. If for example, Jupiter was in its fall in Capricorn in the natal chart, but exalted in Cancer in the navamsa, then Jupiter received extra strength in interpretation.

Traditionally in India neither aspects nor degrees were used in the navamsa. The chart was always set up as signs only, and the ascendant was the navamsa sign of the natal ascendant.

I've done a lot of work with the navamsa over the years and have discovered degrees to be very important. Only the conjunction, square and opposition aspects within the navamsa chart seem to be effective, and the degrees must be fairly close. They cannot be only sign-to-sign.

[Jim Eshelman]

Fagan is off base with his history in this quote, but he did discover new ways of using the navamsa/novien chart.

When Fagan said "our Hindu brethren would have us believe that the novien chart is a secondary geniture," I believe he was talking about Hindu astrologers contemporaneous to himself and with whom he was corresponding. Can't point to anything in particular on that point though. Just a vague memory of having read something about that somewhere, likely in AA magazine.

The traditional Indian way of using the navamsa is different, however. The chart was used as a supplemental marriage chart.

I think he got that. That whole thing about calling it a sexascope.

But its main importance was to indicate a 'second sign' for natal planets. It was especially good if a natal planet was vargottama, in the same sign as a natal planet. If for example, Jupiter was in its fall in Capricorn in the natal chart, but exalted in Cancer in the navamsa, then Jupiter received extra strength in interpretation.

I don't understand. You say It was especially good if a natal planet was in the same sign as a natal planet, then give the example of Jupiter being in the opposite sign from it's place in the natal chart. I must have missed something.

[Jim Eshelman]

I've done a lot of work with the navamsa over the years and have discovered degrees to be very important. Only the conjunction, square and opposition aspects within the navamsa chart seem to be effective, and the degrees must be fairly close. They cannot be only sign-to-sign.

Agreed. (Or, I might have softened it and said, "Only 0, 90, 180 seem worth bothering with most of the time." ) In practice: Agreed.

[Jim Eshelman]

Jupe, vargottama - same sign in Navamsa and rasi (conventional natal horoscope) - is a separate high dignity in the Hindu systems. Think of it this way: There is dignity in a planet being in its home sign or sign of exaltation and, additionally, the rasi sign of a planet becomes a further kind of "home" where it is dignified.

Thus, I have Mars in Sagittarius - where Mars has no natural dignity. But that Sagittarius placement makes Sagittarius a dignity in my Navamsa and, in fact, I have Mars in Sagittarius in the Navamsa.

The Jupiter example was a separate thing: If Jupiter is in Capricorn, it is expected to be debilited (exposed to a nature opposite its own, and therefore at friction); but, according to the traditional way of using Navamsa, if Jupiter is in the Cancer portion of Capricorn, then it adds a dignity to counterbalance (some? all?) of the debility.

[Jim Eshelman]

Speaking of vargottama, one of the most fascinating characteristics of the Navamsa - in stark contrast to the Novien - is that, for the Fagan-Bradley ayanamsa, the three chief defining stellar markers of the zodiac are all vargottama. Additionally, the next two most important markers, though not in the same Navamsa sign as in the "harmonic 1" zodiac, nonetheless show a phenomenal structure with the first set. Here are the zodiacal and Navamsa positions of the following stars, using today's longitudes.

Aldebaran - 15°03' Taurus - Nav. 15°27' Taurus
Spica - 29°06' Virgo - Nav. 21°54' Virgo
Antares - 15°01' Scorpio - Nav. 15°09' Scorpio

Then consider these:

Alcyon (Pleiades) - 5°15' Taurus - Nav. 15°45' Aquarius
Regulus - 5°05' Leo - Nav. 15°45' Taurus

Besides the sign-dignity of the first three, I find it astounding that the Navamsa positions of Aldebaran, Antares, Alcyon, and Regulus are, respectively,
15°27' Taurus
15°09' Scorpio
15°45' Aquarius
15°45' Taurus

[Jim Eshelman]

OK, that makes some sense. A few definitions help a lot. I don't speak Hindi, or whatever that is.

I have to admit, I skipped a lot of Fagan's discussion of Indian astrology. At the time I was having enough trouble dealing with the "signs" and eventually dropped them altogether except for the luminaries. It's only after spending time on solunars I've found any interest in them at all.

If the Navamsa is a form of aspectarian, that's more interesting to me. Can you suggest a book that has some basic information on the structure and how it's used?

Oh, and thank you for taking the time to explain it.

[Jim Eshelman]

Impressive!! (Even though it hasn't been demonstrated before that fixed stars have a relationship to navamsa positions.) At least we're getting closer to the truth of the Aries zodiac. I have always thought that comparing fixed stars to their navamsa longitudes would be an interesting study. Does a star with a supposedly Venus nature fall in a Venus ruled navamsa segment, for example?

[Jim Eshelman]

Should conjunctions to primary angles be taken into account in Navamsa?

My Navamsa-chart gives Pluto & Uranus on ASC (orbs 01*01' and 02*58', respectively), and when I think about it, Ebertin's key-words for UR-PL do resonate with my own self-perception; but on the other hand, it's not really something that could not be concluded from natal chart alone.

I never consider angles in Navamsas. (I'm not saying it's right, I'm saying what I do.) Here is my thinking:

1. I'm not sure they're valid.
2. Every 1 minute error in birthtime changes the angles about 2°.
3. I think it's distinctly possible that Navamsas are just aspectarians - harmonic charts, in the Addey sense - meaning that conjunctions with angles are 40° multiple aspects to angles. Aspects to angles don't exist, only conjunctions, and therefore these would be deceptive, frauds (like taking sextiles to the Ascendant accidentally),

Or, of course, I could be wrong. Maybe this is some magical "other real chart."

[Jim Eshelman]

Start with a couple of things: Look at any conjunctions, oppositions, and squares within 3 degrees and no more than 5. Consider the Moon's sign.

I should have added:

When I came to California in 1975, I found that many in the Sidereal community here had incorporated this in a simpler way that had them never calculating a Novien at all. They simply read its aspects off the natal chart, and that, indeed, is easy and useful.

Every 10° in the natal is 90° in the Novien/Navamsa. That means you just have to look at 10°-multiple aspects (any two longitudes ending in the same degree digit, like my Moon at 27°24' Aquarius and Mercury at 17°20' Libra - no usual aspect, but easy to see that x7°24' is close to x7°20'.)

A 3°-5° orb in the Novien/Navamsa is a 0°20' to 0°33' orb in the natal. So, any natal 10° multiple within 20'-30' produces a conjunction, opposition, or square in the Novien/Navamsa.

You can see these quite easily after you train your eye - consider the following sort from my chart. Think of a 0°20' orb as equivalent to 3°, 0°40' as equivalent to 6°.

1°20' - Neptune 1°20' Libra
1°53' - Venus 1°53' Scorpio
2°06' - Pluto 2°06' Leo
2°28' - Sun 22°28' Virgo
3°20' - Uranus 3°20' Cancer
3°37' - Jupiter 3°37' Cancer
4°57' - Saturn 14°57' Libra
7°20' - Mercury 17°20' Libra
7°24' - Moon 27°24' Aquarius
8°55' - Mars 28°55' Sagittarius

Speaking of vargottama, one of the most fascinating characteristics of the Navamsa - in stark contrast to the Novien - is that, for the Fagan-Bradley ayanamsa, the three chief defining stellar markers of the zodiac are all vargottama. Additionally, the next two most important markers, though not in the same Navamsa sign as in the "harmonic 1" zodiac, nonetheless show a phenomenal structure with the first set. Here are the zodiacal and Navamsa positions of the following stars, using today's longitudes.

Aldebaran - 15°03' Taurus - Nav. 15°27' Taurus
Spica - 29°06' Virgo - Nav. 21°54' Virgo
Antares - 15°01' Scorpio - Nav. 15°09' Scorpio

Then consider these:

Alcyon (Pleiades) - 5°15' Taurus - Nav. 15°45' Aquarius
Regulus - 5°05' Leo - Nav. 15°45' Taurus

Besides the sign-dignity of the first three, I find it astounding that the Navamsa positions of Aldebaran, Antares, Alcyon, and Regulus are, respectively,
15°27' Taurus
15°09' Scorpio
15°45' Aquarius
15°45' Taurus

[Jim Eshelman]

I have some questions about Fagan’s writings in his book ‘A Primer of Sidereal Astrology’ about the Novien/Navamsa.

First, Fagan writes:

Moreover, the positions of the luminaries and planets in the navamsas seem to bear little or no connection with the actual dispositions and environment of the native, and failed to reveal, as claimed in the nadi literature, the date of birth of the marriage partner.

And then after Fagan re-examined the ‘validity’ of the navamsas as computed by Garth Allen, Fagan writes:

The astute reader will soon discover the navamsa of the Moon thus calculated ( see table on page 143 with Allen’s sidereal zodiac) not only intimately describes one’s innermost disposition and the type of environment one was brought up in, but the 2nd or 3rd navamsa of the Moon, if not the first case, for the ladies; and the Sun in the case of the men, often indicates the birthday of the husband or the wife, according to the linganioni system of selecting one’s matrimonial partner. In the matter of intimacies and antipathies, the navamsa quite frequently show a planetary relationship not obvious from an examination of birth charts.

Am I to understand with this thread no one has done enough research to offer their opinion as to the possible truth of what Fagan says with his above words? I have done some work with the navamsa and see a-lot of potential describing an important aspect with one’s personality not see in the birth chart, but Fagan completely looses me about this system ‘indicating the birthday of the husband or wife.’

[Jim Eshelman]

Am I to understand with this thread no one has done enough research to offer their opinion as to the possible truth of what Fagan says with his above words?

I think that's a fair statement, Steve. For me, I've looked in concentrated bursts and the results have been unsatisfactory. There's enough to say that something is going on, but not enough to confirm exactly what it is.

I have done some work with the navamsa and see a-lot of potential describing an important aspect with one’s personality not see in the birth chart, but Fagan completely looses me about this system ‘indicating the birthday of the husband or wife.’

Mine has been mixed. I was an early easy sell on the Novien from that perspective, since my first wife's Sun was less than 2 degrees from conjunct my Novien Moon. But it stopped there,

[Jim Eshelman]

Fagan writes in the same above writings about the Novien/navamsa:

Philogistically, it would appear the navamsa had their origin in ancient Egypt, for the Egyptian phonetics for the new Moon, psd (peshed), and for the number nine were identical!

Also, we can see in the western occult tradition with the link below, the so-called Magical Square of the Moon is based on squaring principles of the number 9. I know one thing for sure, my study of sidereal astrology has taught me the tremendous importance of Moon symbolism, particularly with SSR’s. IMO, we are definitely dealing with something here with the Moon & the Number 9 with lost arcane knowledges.

http://altreligion.about.com/od/western ... e-Moon.htm

[Jim Eshelman]

I always thought that Fagan's layered Novien placements (Noviens of Noviens of Noviens) was overkill. (And I've never placed any reliance on them because I don't even have sufficient evidence that Novien or Navamsa signs exist in the first place.)

Fagan's logic was: If you can validate the Moon's Novien sign, you can be sure the Moon is accurate to within 3°20'. If you can then validate the 2nd Novien (81st harmonic), then you can feel the natal Moon is accurate to within 0°22', or birth time accurate to about three-quarters of an hour. If the 3rd Novien then can be confirmed (729th harmonic), then the Moon is known to be accurate to within 2.5' of arc, or birth time to about 5 minutes of time.

Thus, my "1st Navamsa" is Gemini (or Novien = Libra). If the technique were adequately validated to trust, and this was deemed accurate, then the "2nd Navamsa" is Scorpio (or Novien = Pisces). If this also was deemed accurate (rather than wanting to bump it 0°37' into Sagittarius, for example), then my "3rd Navamsa" would be in Pisces (or Novien in Cancer).

I hate this whole idea of rectification regardless. It's like "guessing Ascendants," a rectification that actually works... about one time in 12! <vbg>

[Jim Eshelman]

A couple of questions arise for me regarding the calculation process.

Does one calculate to account for a parallax moon?

If so... Does one than calculate for natal, relocation or both?

My Moon is calculated to be 1AQ39... however my parallax moon for natal is 1AQ14 and currently my relocated parallax moon is 1AQ34....

My Natal Navamsa(Parallax) Moon is 11LI06 (Saturn14Li56)
My Relocated Navamsa(Parallax) Moon is 14LI09 (Saturn14LI56)
My Natal Novien(Parallax) Moon is 11AQ06 (Saturn11AQ56)
My Relocated Novien(Parallax) Moon is 14AQ09 (Saturn14AQ56)
My Natal & Relocated Navamsa Moon is 14LI52 (Saturn14LI56)
My Natal & Relocated Novien Moon is 14AQ52 (Saturn14AQ56)

When I did a search on this forum for information on parallax I came to the conclusion that it has not been addressed... I would be interested in learning from others their experience with their research into the question of utilizing parallax or not.

Having a prominent Saturn (10th house- 5 degrees from MH) is something that i am well aware of.... tends to make me a 'worker' of sorts....

[Jim Eshelman]

Great question. Here's the answer: Though Donald Bradley wrote the only book of note on parallax and astrology, he later abandoned the idea (rightly so IMO). It was his work in Sidereal Lunar Returns that made clear that parallax is not an issue in astrology, which is geocentric in its operation and not topocentric.

BTW, Bradley was born at moonrise, so if there were a parallax factor to consider, he would literally have been the first to notice and, in general, lunar returns wouldn't work. Similarly, I was born at moonset.

[Jim Eshelman]

I did not know Bradley wrote a book on the ‘parallax’ issue in astrology. I assume he wrote his ‘parallax’ book before he discovered Sidereal Lunar Returns.

[Jim Eshelman]

I did not know Bradley wrote a book on the ‘parallax’ issue in astrology. I assume he wrote his ‘parallax’ book before he discovered Sidereal Lunar Returns.

Fagan discovered SLRs. Yes, Bradley's investigation of them came later.

Here's the book:
http://www.amazon.com/Parallax-Problem- ... ld+bradley

[Jim Eshelman]

Thanks Jim, and a well written review by you on Amazon.

[Jim Eshelman]

Can people in her confirm or dismiss Fagan's idea that the placement of the Sun in the novien is the same sign as the Sun in the natal chart of the marriage partner? I find this very interesting indeed as it proves right in the only case I have married.

I've rarely seen that to be true - either by Navamsa or Novien. However, in my own case, my longest primary relationship was with someone who has Sun in Scorpio, which is where my Navamsa Sun falls.

OTOH, her Novien Sun (or, for that matter, her Navamsa Sun) is not in my natal Sun-sign.

It wasn't true of my first wife. The other most important marriage-like relationship (my current and expected to be permanent one) is with someone with a Taurus Sun - the opposite sign FWIW.

I say this despite the fact that I have serious doubts about the Novien and suspect that, of the two, the Navamsa is the reliable one; but it's been damnably hard to confirm either way.

The pattern I can confirm most from my own experience is that, just as the most common Moon sign of significant partners has been my natal Moon sign or its opposite, so has the most common Novien/Navamsa Moon-sign been my own Novien/Navamsa Moon-sign or its opposite.

[Jim Eshelman]

The pattern I can confirm most from my own experience is that, just as the most common Moon sign of significant partners has been my natal Moon sign or its opposite, so has the most common Novien/Navamsa Moon-sign been my own Novien/Navamsa Moon-sign or its opposite.

29% of the most important women in my life have their Moons in Leo or Aquarius (my Moon is in Aquarius). Statistically, we would expect 17% to have Moon in one pair of signs.

17% of them (twice what's expected) have their Sun in Libra, which is my Novien Moon sign. This includes my first wife.

22% have their Novien Moons in Libra or Aries (or Navamsa Moon in Gemini or Sagittarius). My Moon is in Libra (Novien) or Gemini (Navamsa) so, again, the alignment is with the Moon sign or its opposite.

[Jim Eshelman]

Prince's Navamsa Moon 10Sag26 aspects Natal Mars 6PI20

Prince's Novien Moon 10Aries26.... conj. Natal Venus 13Aries40 well describes is love of music and people.

To my mind Novien Moon conjunct Natal Venus is a much better character indicator.

Prince Novien Chart.jpg

[Jim Eshelman]

I tend to agree, except his Taurus Sun already incorporates all of that so it's hard to tell. In either case he has an exact Moon-Jupiter square in the Nav/Nov, and Moon conjunct Neptune.

Neither Nav/Nov Moon was transited when he died, something I've been occasionally watching to see if there is a "real" planet that can be tracked this way.

[Jim Eshelman]

Price's Novien Moon 10Aries26.... conj. Natal Venus 13Aries40 well describes is love of music and people.

To my mind Novien Moon conjunct Natal Venus is a much better character indicator.

But this is what we are told not to do.
We are told not to compare the Novien or harmonic charts to the natal chart, but rather look at it on it's own. And this harmonic chart does show Moon-Neptune conjunction square Jupiter which can also describe his success (Jupiter) and musical talent and drug addiction (Moon-Neptune)

[Jim Eshelman]

Fagan made a loud point of comparing them. Most of his examples center around that exact thing.

I'm not saying he was right. (Maybe yes, maybe no.) I'm saying that I can see why a Siderealist trained in Fagan's writings would go that route.

[Jim Eshelman]

Yes I saw that in Fagan's writings, but I don't think I've seen it elsewhere and most of what I've read so far about it is that harmonic charts should not be compared to the natal.

If anyone in here has explored this field in detail and thinks he/she has some kind of solid evidence, it would be great to see that. I do not see Fagan do that in his book PSA.

In my view if I just use rational thought, comparing one harmonic chart to the natal is taking the chart out of it's context to put it where it does not belong.

[SteveS]

I have read in different places where Vedic astrologers used harmonics of numbers with the Sidereal Z and its zodiacal circle. How? No one seems to know. I do know for sure the Vedic system placed great faith in the # 9 with some of their methods of astrology, but no one here in the WEST seems to know for sure what the Vedic branch was doing with # 9 specifically with the Sidereal Z, or for that matter in whole, specifically, with Native's Charts
Jim posted this a few years back this thread:

Speaking of vargottama, one of the most fascinating characteristics of the Navamsa - in stark contrast to the Novien - is that, for the Fagan-Bradley ayanamsa, the three chief defining stellar markers of the zodiac are all vargottama. Additionally, the next two most important markers, though not in the same Navamsa sign as in the "harmonic 1" zodiac, nonetheless show a phenomenal structure with the first set. Here are the zodiacal and Navamsa positions of the following stars, using today's longitudes…
Besides the sign-dignity of the first three, I find it astounding that the Navamsa positions of Aldebaran, Antares, Alcyon, and Regulus are, respectively,
15°27' Taurus
15°09' Scorpio
15°45' Aquarius
15°45' Taurus

This is solid proof to me that the # 9 could be playing a most important role with our Sidereal Zodiac with other possibilities. A couple of days ago Mikestar posted an observation about the number 9 in a discussion about a possible WHY the Capricorn Ingress is the Master Mundane Astrology chart in the Sidereal Zodiac? Mike stated:

When calculating noviens there are eight degrees of the zodiac that are the own noviens: 0 Hub and 15 Spoke. There are nine degrees which have a novien of 0 Ta: 0 Ta itself, 10 Gem, 20 Cn, 0 Vir, 10 Li, 20 Sc , 0 Cp, 10 Aq, and 20 Pi, and again 0 Cp is the only Rim ingress in the group. I suspect the primacy of the Capricorn Ingress is related to 9H, and take note that since Ta is the first sign, Cp is the ninth.

This stunned me and I want to spread this as much as possible among other Sidereal Mundane Astrologers, for it’s the only pure observation I have seen which could explain the WHY for the vast importance of the Cap Ingress being a true Master Mundane Chart. I really don’t know in what thread/topic Mike’s observation belongs, but I thought Jim’s thread here a good start.

It should also be pointed out: A starting point of 0 Taurus is being used, I think, for these Sidereal Z observations with the # 9. I could press further and say only as an observation, it could be O Taurus a possible true fidiual of the Sidereal Z. WHY, I don't know except through strong mythologial language and some beleifs by Fagan and Bradley.

[Jim Eshelman]

BTW, I was the one who first posted that pattern in the Navamsas of the fixed stars. It's the one cool finding that I regret in abandoning the Navamsa model, but since the rest of the model fails badly compared to the Novien, I felt I had to let it go. It (like the Solar Apex) would have been cool if true, but the evidence suggests it's probably not true.

[Jim Eshelman]

...no one here in the WEST seems to know for sure what the Vedic branch was doing with # 9 specifically with the Sidereal Z, or for that matter in whole, specifically, with Native's Charts

The Vedic system isn't doing anything with the Sidereal Zodiac because they don't use it - they use other similar but different zodiacs.

And it's not true that nobody here in the West knows what they're doing. Lots of us know. The information hasn't been secret. Fagan knew and used it as a basis, before springing off on his own discoveries. It's also true that much of what they're doing is based on house rulerships and other grossly questionable tactics so.

A couple of days ago Mikestar posted an observation about the number 9 in a discussion about a possible WHY the Capricorn Ingress is the Master Mundane Astrology chart in the Sidereal Zodiac?

Just to be clear, he was quoting me from several earlier posts. I'm sorry you hadn't seen it before. I think I'd mentioned it in the same thread, in response to one of your questions.

[SteveS]

Jim wrote:

Just to be clear, he was quoting me from several earlier posts. I'm sorry you hadn't seen it before. I think I'd mentioned it in the same thread, in response to one of your questions.

Thanks for this clarity Jim, then I guess its ok for it to be placed in this thread. I did not realize Mike was quoting your words, sorry. Its the only explanation I have seen that explains to me why the Cap Ingress is the Master Mundane Chart of the year, its brilliant IMO.

[Jim Eshelman]

I also think that something like that is involved - some similar 45° structure caused by 40° wave lapping itself eight time around the circle. I dearly wish it were that simple in exactly the same amount that I wish we could confirm the Solar Apex answer to be legit. But, given the evidence of the Novien over the Navamsa, I no longer find acceptable that this wave arises from 0° Rim.

Of course, we don't really need this explanation in order to use Sidereal astrology. The "why" questions are the worst questions to try to answer, since they usually end up spiraling into speculation. But it would still be a nice convenience to silence a few of Sidereal astrology's critics who seem to think that without a physical anchor-point there is no basis for the Sidereal zodiac.

On "why 0° Capricorn," there's another speculative answer I gave in the other thread. It's a combination of "why Rim" and "why begin with Earth signs." For the first part, I wrote in the Solar Apex thread:

The more it seems that Taurus is the proper "first sign of the zodiac" not just symbolically and historically but in ways that matter to the structure of the zodiac (e.g., Noviens counting from 0° Taurus, not Navamsas counting from 0° Aries), it stirs the question of why Rim constellations should be the pivotal ingresses. (Why not Hub? And yet, having run Hub and Spoke ingresses for categories of event with nothing to show for it, we know it is not the Hub constellations but, rather, the Rims.)

Over time, I've settled into the idea that this is because the Rim constellations are (at least in some small way) like angles: Their nature of action and, especially, the Rim is the outermost part of the wheel. Tre starting point or origin may indeed (as it seems to be) be Hubs, and it makes way more sense for the constellations to go Hub, then Spoke, then Rim - from the inmost point of the wheel to the outermost - so the pattern of expression, action, movement is naturally Rim.

Of course, this is all a theory. It's all interpretive symbolism, so there's no way to prove it IS a real thing. But I'm comfortable with it and, in particular, it explains to me why Rims are the basis of the ingress model. It also does a jiffy job moving us from the old "Aries is first" idea because Rims are obviously the LAST of the three groups in the sense of being the outcome, the outermost, of that impulse which started at the inmost center of the Hub.

Ah... and there is another spin on the old metaphors. It's not just that the hub is the center of the wheel, but the impulse has to begin at the very center of the hub; and it is at the inmost center of the hub - the bull's-eye - that the zodiac was first marked. Not just any old place ibn the hub but the inmost center of it, at 15°00' Taurus.

I think this is important to the current question in another sense: A 9th harmonic wave, the foundation of the Novien and something that increasingly seems important, may be part of the mathematical structure defining the zodiac because a 40° wave, though going nine times around the zodiac, catches up with itself - laps itself - not every 40° but every 45°. An origin not at 0° Taurus but at 15° Taurus - the inmost center of the Hub - spikes at every 15° Hub AND every 0° Rim.

All of that said... I already know that you are convinced that these ingress points are rightly 0° Rim, and perhaps the foregoing gives something to anchor that.

But I bet you still have a question in your mind.. perhaps wondering why, of four possible Rims, Capricorn is the one that seems to come out in the lead. Yes?

I probably caused confusion because I was trying to tease answers out of you and stir some thinking. I didn't want to say outright what was on my mind, but wanted to give the first part of the answer and leave it hanging. (Sorry about that.)

Then, a little farther down the thread, I let the other shoe drop:

BTW, having the zodiac measured from 0° [Taurus] would complete the picture on why 0°Capricorn is the Master Point IF we had proof that the Nakshatras are important - which, however, we don't have (yet? ever?). The Nakshatra and Novien/Navamsa models are part of the same structure (four Navamsas/Noviens = one Nakshatra), and a 'mansion' structure originating from 0° Taurus would complete its 120° pattern at 0° Virgo and... 0° Capricorn. In that speculative universe, Rimness in the 'solar zodiac' and the structural wave of the 'lunar zodiac' would converge at 0° Capricorn.

This is the main reason I've devoted so much space (though so fruitlessly) to trying to confirm - and giving materials to study - the Nakshatras. I haven't been able to confirm they exist, not even a simple "this is interesting stuff" sort of anecdotal evidence. BUT (big 'but'), if we DID have evidence of 27 sections of 13°20' each measured from 0° Taurus being astrologically meaningful, then this would be a nine-sector pattern restarting itself at 0° Taurus, 0° Virgo, and 0° Capricorn. The "master point" for ingresses would be where Rim quality intersected this other rhythm.

However, I've never been able to confirm the Nakshatra pattern exists, so I can't use this explanation either.

[Jim Eshelman]

I do agree with you, Steve, that there are a lot of hints that the number 9 is important in the structure of the zodiac.

The two primary aspect families that have proven themselves valuable being with dividing the circle by 2 and by 3. The usual development is that the circle is divided by 2 one time (creating conjunction and opposition) then divided by 2 another time (creating squares), etc.; and the zodiac is divided by 3 one time (creating trines and sextiles) and so forth.

However, if the division by 3 is then further divided by three, something interesting happens:

Divide by 2 once, and then by 2 again: We get 90°, a distance that we see all over astrology as the rhythm of the angles, the quadruplicities (rising from hub through spokes to rim), and more.

Then divide the circle by 3, and then by 3 again: We get 40°, a distance we notice much less often, then astrologers generally don't pay attention to very much.

And yet, these two distances used together probably define the zodiac by their behavior: The 40° wave creates (by three cycles) a 120° wave. The intersection of this and the 90° wave together define most of the mathematical details of the zodiac.

Still, it's just a mental exercise unless it delivers something new and useful. It may only be a representational model and not a "real" thing in nature.

[SteveS]

Jim wrote:

I do agree with you, Steve, that there are a lot of hints that the number 9 is important in the structure of the zodiac.

Thanks Jim, It interest me much with many thoughts. I do agree with Fagan when he writes:

So, obviously 9 is a prophetic numeral.

It’s just that I don’t feel we have all the missing pieces to the number 9 as the ancients were working with astrologically. Sometimes I am not sure I understand where Fagan is coming from and you are the only one I know who I can ask who may offer me more clarity. I am only trying to understand things astrologically. Here are some more words from Fagan from “Astrological Origins” in the chapter on Noviens which I find most interesting:

But with the Navamsa charts it is otherwise. Actually this is nothing else but an aspecterian-vernier, which shows the configurations between celestial bodies deemed to be valid and not those existing in the Natal chart at all. In all probability this may have been the original and authentic method of determining effective aspects in vogue in ancient Egypt, Babylon, and India and may indicate existing methods of doing this are false. …Whereas the novien is a more intimate and personal chart, depicting the true destiny of an individual by means of the mutual aspects subsisting between the planets, which are frequently not at all apparent in the birth chart. Perhaps our astrology will be more meaningful should we revert to this ancient usage.

The problem is: We really don’t know for sure what the pure “ancient usage” encompassed, nor did Fagan know. I see the harmonic authors trying to build a bridge back to the ancient usage, and it is leading them to India with harmonic charts, but I think the modern astrologers in India are not working with the pure knowledge of the ancients, its been diluted and we don’t know for sure what is false or true. I do know this: With my recent research experience into harmonic charts, I am seeing glimpses of something that could be very important which I think echo Fagan’s above feelings/words which are some very thought provoking words for me. Anyway, I am satisfied you are closer to the truth with your words than any other Sidereal Astrologer I know, as to the WHY the Cap Ingress offers so much prophetic content, and you have definitely related this back to the number 9. I am just trying to learn new things, can’t help myself.

[Jim Eshelman]

When I eventually get The Big Book volume 1 done, a late chapter in it will address the Novien and (based on all the basic structure developed for natal analysis up to that point in time) will give a rational basis for incorporating it alongside the natal.

Whatever the ancients used it for (and we don't have direct proof that the Egyptians DID use it), the bigger question is what we can use it for today. The Novien seems to add important layers to synastry in particular - consistent with the primary Hindu usage. It also appears to be an important analytic tool of character, especially of underlying patterns (some subconscious, some quite obvious) that interacts with the normal nativity.

I think, though, that we need to be conservative in this use, though: It is quite rare that the nativity itself doesn't fully describe a person. Even when I can authenticate basic stuff the Novien is showing (which is most of the time), it may already be in the natal. There is a very legitimate question of, "Really, what do we need a second natal chart for? The one we already have does the job for us." The answer is, "Well, yeah, except every so often it doesn't, and the Novien picks up the slack."

I'm sure astrologers in India are missing the point because, first of all, they are 120° off on Navamsa positions, and then they treat the Navamsa with highly questionable methods. If we approach it simply, using what we already know of astrology, we'll be on a much more correct path.

[Jim Eshelman]

An example of, "Yeah, but do we really need a second nativity even if it's accurate?" is readily available in my Novien.

The most important, pronounced feature of my Novien is Moon square Mercury 0°26'. I accept that this is entirely descriptive of me. I think, though, that a fair question is: But how can you really tell it's important since I am so Mercurial anyway, from my Virgo Sun. Sure, Sun in Virgo isn't the same as Moon square Mercury, but what most clearly shows is that I'm most definitely mercurial - which the nativity already shows.

Or: Novien Uranus closely squares my natal Moon. But that Moon is in Aquarius anyway. Do we learn anything from adding a Moon-Uranus aspect? Isn't it just static or noise diffusing the clarity of the main broadcast, even if it's true?

Your Novien has a close Mercury-Pluto opposition and your natal Mars-Jupiter trine folds into a conjunction. The latter doesn't add much: The Mars-Jupiter aspect is already there in the natal, and having it so close that it becomes a conjunction in the Novien is just another way of saying it's a really close strong trine. Similarly, the Mercury-Pluto opposition is just your really close natal sextile. Again, to see these patterns we don't need the Novien - even though it's accurate. Looking at it is doing more work for no more information.

It is pretty cool to know that it seems to work, though

You have a similar Moon-Mercury vs. Virgo Sun pattern as I do since your Novien Moon at 18°22' Pisces is opposite natal Mercury and, in your case, Neptune. Mostly what I wrote about these above for me fits you, too.

But you might get some new information from Novien Saturn square natal Venus. (I'm not sure. Does this seem accurate to you?)

[Jim Eshelman]

Where your Novien does seem helpful is in synastry. Using the Novien to compare your chart and your wife's:

24°01 Sco - Gayle natal Mars
25°31' Tau - Steve Novien Sun

28°23' Ari - Gayle's Novien Moon
29°42' Lib - Steve's natal Jupiter

6°10' Gem - Gayle's Novien Mars
7°27' Vir - Steve's natal Venus

0°46' Sag - Gayle's Novien Neptune
1°58' Pis - Gayle's Novien Jupiter
2°50' Vir - Steve's natal Sun

[SteveS]

Jim wrote:

I'm sure astrologers in India are missing the point because, first of all, they are 120° off on Navamsa positions, and then they treat the Navamsa with highly questionable methods. If we approach it simply, using what we already know of astrology, we'll be on a much more correct path.

Exactly.
Jim wrote:

But you might get some new information from Novien Saturn square natal Venus. (I'm not sure. Does this seem accurate to you?)

I went through a very bloody divorce between my Father & Mother with me right in the middle of it wrecking my life for years before the final divorce through the courts/lawyers, it’s a long-long story.

Indeed the Novien Synastry between wife & I offers par-excellent symbolism. The general consensus in India seems to indicate Novien very important chart for relationships.

[Jim Eshelman]

This is the same direction we've been sliding. I still don't check it most of the time because the basic synastry works so well (and will get easier and more insightful when the synastry modules are added to TMSA); but when one brings in Novien-to-Natal synastry, the results are sometimes mind-blowing.

Surely the strangest thing is that while Novien-to-Natal aspects work, Novien-to-Novien seem worthless. You'd expect they'd work in the same framework but they don't. You'd think they work just because they uncover hidden 10°-multiple aspects, but they don't. (In fact - never thought of this - that might be why: To the extent the Novien is substantially a kind of aspectarian, these may be aspects that don't work in synastry, just as we ignore or majorly underplay trines and sextiles.)

[Danica]

Surely the strangest thing is that while Novien-to-Natal aspects work, Novien-to-Novien seem worthless. You'd expect they'd work in the same framework but they don't. You'd think they work just because they uncover hidden 10°-multiple aspects, but they don't. (In fact - never thought of this - that might be why: To the extent the Novien is substantially a kind of aspectarian, these may be aspects that don't work in synastry, just as we ignore or majorly underplay trines and sextiles.)

There’s this poignant proof-in-the-pudding of these aspects working, that’s been especially staring in my face for the past two days - I wish I can say it is not so, but the facts of experience say otherwise: my synastry with Zarko, with his Novien Sun sq my Novien Mars 1*50’ - this is one of four in total of our Nov-Nov inter-aspects within 2* orb, and the only one of them that includes a Light (I’m applying the criterion: only cnj, sq and opp ).

In retrospect now, I see how this describes (with painfully perfect exactitude to it) what has kept me in this relationship for so long. I have been - persistently, throughout time, since the very first time we met - perceiving him as an inherently dignified person, simply as someone who, by their very being deserves my utmost respect, and have been consistently, for over 15 years, approaching him accordingly; so much so that literally none of the many so ugly, so horrible that I can freely say inhumane actions performed by this person, has made me perceive him and act toward him differently.

I remembered yesterday one particular event from early August 2005, it was the day that I was released from the hospital after that appendix surgery during which the pregnancy was revealed -- look at those two strongest by orb of all of our inter-aspects, his rx Pl cnj my nov Ve 02’ and his nov Sa sq my rx Ve 09’, to get a precis, brief and brutally sharp picture of the exact nature of the event – and remembered how I’ve processed it inside, and simply, instead of at the very least fully disengaging to have anything further to do with such person ( !! I can not, even now, bring myself to use some words other than “such person” - although there are words that are far more fitting and descriptive of the nature-qualities of this individual), continued with having a relationship with him.

If we remove this one aspect, literally nothing else in the synastry shows this inner attitude of respect that I’ve been feeling, and exactly with its peculiar quality and all of its expression in behavior as it has been, and it going on and on for as long, regardless of what he actually does.